Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the State Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Fiscal analyst projects surplus, outlines spending priorities as revenue grows
Summary
The legislative fiscal analyst told the House that Utah’s 1994 economy produced about 50,000 new jobs and that revenue estimates for 1995–96 show surpluses; he outlined priorities including continuation costs, federal mandates, enrollment growth, a 4% compensation reserve and elevated corrections needs.
The legislative fiscal analyst addressed the House in a Committee of the Whole on Jan. 16, presenting detailed revenue estimates and economic indicators for 1994–1996 and describing how the analyst’s office has packaged priorities for the coming budget cycle.
"There were 50,000 new jobs created in the state of Utah during 1994 for a growth rate of 6.2%," the analyst said. He summarized other key data: unemployment around 3.7% (projected to remain low), robust construction-led growth in 1994, average annual wages around $22,400 (below the national average), and projected slower but continuing growth in 1995 (roughly 4.3%).
On revenues, the analyst said the general fund estimate for FY 1996 is materially higher than last year’s projection: "the general fund has increased $29,000,572," and the uniform school fund estimate increased by about $32.2 million relative to the estimates adopted last January, producing surplus capacity for committees to allocate. He told members the combined general fund and uniform school fund estimates for 1996 are about $15.5 million higher than the governor’s figure.
The analyst described the budgetary "building blocks" used to assemble spending recommendations: (1) continuation costs driven by prior legislative action, (2) federal mandates, (3) state mandates, (4) enrollment growth in education and related programs, (5) program continuation and (6) program enhancements and new initiatives. He said the office had set aside a 4% compensation reserve (to be allocated by the executive appropriations committee) and had prioritized corrections, juvenile services, public education and higher education for likely increases in funding.
Members asked for supporting documentation; the analyst offered to provide supplemental numbers on request. Representative questions focused on the composition of surpluses and the precise amounts reserved for compensation and other priorities. The Committee dissolved after a motion of thanks to the analyst.
What’s next: The executive appropriations committee and subcommittees will use these estimates to refine spending levels; the analyst’s office will supply detailed fiscal notes and building blocks to support committee deliberations.
